Tagged: fight

0

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

Defense

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

  • By Lauren C. Williams
  • Dec 14, 2017
780th Military Intelligence Brigade conduct cyberspace operations during a training rotation for the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., Jan. 24. 2016; (Photo Credit: U.S. Army photo) 

Field cyber training operations at Ft. Irwin in California, from Jan. 2016. (Photo credit: U.S. Army)

What started as an Army Cyber Command-led initiative to train tactical units in offensive cyber operations has blossomed into all-encompassing collaboration focused on operationalizing cyber warfare on the front lines.

But, officially, no such thing exists.

The Cyber Electromagnetic Activities Support to Corps and Below pilot program launched[1] in 2015 and wrapped up its first phase in September. At the Association of the U.S. Army’s “hot topic” event on cyber operations and the future fight Wednesday, Army Cyber leaders reflected on the program and how it can be made even more trainable and scalable[2] across the entire force.

“It was a lot harder to do this in the operational environment than it was to do a PowerPoint slide,” Col. William J. Hartman, U.S. Army Cyber Command’s deputy commander for Joint Force headquarters joked during his AUSA panel on the CEMA program.

“You have to be able to do this in the middle of a monsoon in Polk, La., or any other operational area,” he added. “You have to be able to do this when it’s 118 degrees and the wind is blowing 70 miles an hour.”

Hartman noted that effective communication between cyber and tactical teams is a surmountable challenge. But to be successful at the tactical level, cyber teams must be able to talk about techniques and capabilities in maneuver terms.

“There was a lack of knowledge” from a cyber and operational standpoint on how to integrate with the operational force, which included light infantry airborne, armor and Stryker brigade combat teams.

So far, the CEMA pilot program, which produced expeditionary cyber teams, has participated in eight different rotations where cyber and brigade combat teams train together for six months.

“If the unit is doing a field exercise from Ft. Riley, we go through the field exercise with them,” Hartman said. “We go through any of their battle command training exercises. We participate in their leadership training program that they go through prior to going through prior to going to a combat training center rotation.”

“But right now, expeditionary cyber teams don’t exist in the Army,” Hartman said. He said there were elements of the teams being used worldwide with U.S. allies, but declined to give specifics.

“We formed these teams for specific purposes based on requirements. So whether it’s going to support a lightning force exercise in Korea or Hawaii, or whether it’s going to support a national training exercise or go into [Joint Readiness Training Center] with the S5s. We bring in these soldiers and civilians from across the formation and they stay together for the duration of this thing,” Hartman told reporters following the event.

The ECT teams – typically comprised of fewer than 10 people including defensive and offensive cyber operators, planners, and electronic warfare soldiers — help address specific directives tailored to what skills and capabilities combat commanders need soldiers to have.

“When you look at the Army’s mission of attack and destroy, not everything is ‘destroy,’ [it’s] how can I influence” the adversaries, said Col. Robert Ryan, who commands the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii and has participated in the pilot. “How can I non-kinetically reach up and create confusion and gain control…I don’t have to always render [adversaries] neutral in the sense of death but I can influence them in other ways.”

But all of this is still experimental and there’s no hard timeline on when that will change.

Hartman said CEMA was initially slated for two years but they expect to continue doing three rotations a year, tying them into other initiatives.

Additionally, the Army is still working on how to structure and best integrate the cyber electromagnetic activities at the corps, division, and brigade levels.

“The demand [for information] isn’t going down across society,” said Ryan, who mentioned ECT teams increase his soldiers’ ability to conduct operations. “It’ll be interesting to see how we can leverage that information highway.”

About the Author

Lauren C. Williams is a staff writer at FCW covering defense and cybersecurity.

Prior to joining FCW, Williams was the tech reporter for ThinkProgress, where she covered everything from internet culture to national security issues. In past positions, Williams covered health care, politics and crime for various publications, including The Seattle Times.

Williams graduated with a master’s in journalism from the University of Maryland, College Park and a bachelor’s in dietetics from the University of Delaware. She can be contacted at [email protected][3], or follow her on Twitter @lalaurenista[4].

Click here[5] for previous articles by Wiliams.

References

  1. ^ launched (www.army.mil)
  2. ^ trainable and scalable (defensesystems.com)
  3. ^ [email protected] (fcw.com)
  4. ^ @lalaurenista (twitter.com)
  5. ^ Click here (fcw.com)
0

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

Defense

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

  • By Lauren C. Williams
  • Dec 14, 2017
780th Military Intelligence Brigade conduct cyberspace operations during a training rotation for the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., Jan. 24. 2016; (Photo Credit: U.S. Army photo) 

Field cyber training operations at Ft. Irwin in California, from Jan. 2016. (Photo credit: U.S. Army)

What started as an Army Cyber Command-led initiative to train tactical units in offensive cyber operations has blossomed into all-encompassing collaboration focused on operationalizing cyber warfare on the front lines.

But, officially, no such thing exists.

The Cyber Electromagnetic Activities Support to Corps and Below pilot program launched[1] in 2015 and wrapped up its first phase in September. At the Association of the U.S. Army’s “hot topic” event on cyber operations and the future fight Wednesday, Army Cyber leaders reflected on the program and how it can be made even more trainable and scalable[2] across the entire force.

“It was a lot harder to do this in the operational environment than it was to do a PowerPoint slide,” Col. William J. Hartman, U.S. Army Cyber Command’s deputy commander for Joint Force headquarters joked during his AUSA panel on the CEMA program.

“You have to be able to do this in the middle of a monsoon in Polk, La., or any other operational area,” he added. “You have to be able to do this when it’s 118 degrees and the wind is blowing 70 miles an hour.”

Hartman noted that effective communication between cyber and tactical teams is a surmountable challenge. But to be successful at the tactical level, cyber teams must be able to talk about techniques and capabilities in maneuver terms.

“There was a lack of knowledge” from a cyber and operational standpoint on how to integrate with the operational force, which included light infantry airborne, armor and Stryker brigade combat teams.

So far, the CEMA pilot program, which produced expeditionary cyber teams, has participated in eight different rotations where cyber and brigade combat teams train together for six months.

“If the unit is doing a field exercise from Ft. Riley, we go through the field exercise with them,” Hartman said. “We go through any of their battle command training exercises. We participate in their leadership training program that they go through prior to going through prior to going to a combat training center rotation.”

“But right now, expeditionary cyber teams don’t exist in the Army,” Hartman said. He said there were elements of the teams being used worldwide with U.S. allies, but declined to give specifics.

“We formed these teams for specific purposes based on requirements. So whether it’s going to support a lightning force exercise in Korea or Hawaii, or whether it’s going to support a national training exercise or go into [Joint Readiness Training Center] with the S5s. We bring in these soldiers and civilians from across the formation and they stay together for the duration of this thing,” Hartman told reporters following the event.

The ECT teams – typically comprised of fewer than 10 people including defensive and offensive cyber operators, planners, and electronic warfare soldiers — help address specific directives tailored to what skills and capabilities combat commanders need soldiers to have.

“When you look at the Army’s mission of attack and destroy, not everything is ‘destroy,’ [it’s] how can I influence” the adversaries, said Col. Robert Ryan, who commands the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii and has participated in the pilot. “How can I non-kinetically reach up and create confusion and gain control…I don’t have to always render [adversaries] neutral in the sense of death but I can influence them in other ways.”

But all of this is still experimental and there’s no hard timeline on when that will change.

Hartman said CEMA was initially slated for two years but they expect to continue doing three rotations a year, tying them into other initiatives.

Additionally, the Army is still working on how to structure and best integrate the cyber electromagnetic activities at the corps, division, and brigade levels.

“The demand [for information] isn’t going down across society,” said Ryan, who mentioned ECT teams increase his soldiers’ ability to conduct operations. “It’ll be interesting to see how we can leverage that information highway.”

About the Author

Lauren C. Williams is a staff writer at FCW covering defense and cybersecurity.

Prior to joining FCW, Williams was the tech reporter for ThinkProgress, where she covered everything from internet culture to national security issues. In past positions, Williams covered health care, politics and crime for various publications, including The Seattle Times.

Williams graduated with a master’s in journalism from the University of Maryland, College Park and a bachelor’s in dietetics from the University of Delaware. She can be contacted at [email protected][3], or follow her on Twitter @lalaurenista[4].

Click here[5] for previous articles by Wiliams.

References

  1. ^ launched (www.army.mil)
  2. ^ trainable and scalable (defensesystems.com)
  3. ^ [email protected] (fcw.com)
  4. ^ @lalaurenista (twitter.com)
  5. ^ Click here (fcw.com)
0

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

Defense

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

  • By Lauren C. Williams
  • Dec 14, 2017
780th Military Intelligence Brigade conduct cyberspace operations during a training rotation for the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., Jan. 24. 2016; (Photo Credit: U.S. Army photo) 

Field cyber training operations at Ft. Irwin in California, from Jan. 2016. (Photo credit: U.S. Army)

What started as an Army Cyber Command-led initiative to train tactical units in offensive cyber operations has blossomed into all-encompassing collaboration focused on operationalizing cyber warfare on the front lines.

But, officially, no such thing exists.

The Cyber Electromagnetic Activities Support to Corps and Below pilot program launched[1] in 2015 and wrapped up its first phase in September. At the Association of the U.S. Army’s “hot topic” event on cyber operations and the future fight Wednesday, Army Cyber leaders reflected on the program and how it can be made even more trainable and scalable[2] across the entire force.

“It was a lot harder to do this in the operational environment than it was to do a PowerPoint slide,” Col. William J. Hartman, U.S. Army Cyber Command’s deputy commander for Joint Force headquarters joked during his AUSA panel on the CEMA program.

“You have to be able to do this in the middle of a monsoon in Polk, La., or any other operational area,” he added. “You have to be able to do this when it’s 118 degrees and the wind is blowing 70 miles an hour.”

Hartman noted that effective communication between cyber and tactical teams is a surmountable challenge. But to be successful at the tactical level, cyber teams must be able to talk about techniques and capabilities in maneuver terms.

“There was a lack of knowledge” from a cyber and operational standpoint on how to integrate with the operational force, which included light infantry airborne, armor and Stryker brigade combat teams.

So far, the CEMA pilot program, which produced expeditionary cyber teams, has participated in eight different rotations where cyber and brigade combat teams train together for six months.

“If the unit is doing a field exercise from Ft. Riley, we go through the field exercise with them,” Hartman said. “We go through any of their battle command training exercises. We participate in their leadership training program that they go through prior to going through prior to going to a combat training center rotation.”

“But right now, expeditionary cyber teams don’t exist in the Army,” Hartman said. He said there were elements of the teams being used worldwide with U.S. allies, but declined to give specifics.

“We formed these teams for specific purposes based on requirements. So whether it’s going to support a lightning force exercise in Korea or Hawaii, or whether it’s going to support a national training exercise or go into [Joint Readiness Training Center] with the S5s. We bring in these soldiers and civilians from across the formation and they stay together for the duration of this thing,” Hartman told reporters following the event.

The ECT teams – typically comprised of fewer than 10 people including defensive and offensive cyber operators, planners, and electronic warfare soldiers — help address specific directives tailored to what skills and capabilities combat commanders need soldiers to have.

“When you look at the Army’s mission of attack and destroy, not everything is ‘destroy,’ [it’s] how can I influence” the adversaries, said Col. Robert Ryan, who commands the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii and has participated in the pilot. “How can I non-kinetically reach up and create confusion and gain control…I don’t have to always render [adversaries] neutral in the sense of death but I can influence them in other ways.”

But all of this is still experimental and there’s no hard timeline on when that will change.

Hartman said CEMA was initially slated for two years but they expect to continue doing three rotations a year, tying them into other initiatives.

Additionally, the Army is still working on how to structure and best integrate the cyber electromagnetic activities at the corps, division, and brigade levels.

“The demand [for information] isn’t going down across society,” said Ryan, who mentioned ECT teams increase his soldiers’ ability to conduct operations. “It’ll be interesting to see how we can leverage that information highway.”

About the Author

Lauren C. Williams is a staff writer at FCW covering defense and cybersecurity.

Prior to joining FCW, Williams was the tech reporter for ThinkProgress, where she covered everything from internet culture to national security issues. In past positions, Williams covered health care, politics and crime for various publications, including The Seattle Times.

Williams graduated with a master’s in journalism from the University of Maryland, College Park and a bachelor’s in dietetics from the University of Delaware. She can be contacted at [email protected][3], or follow her on Twitter @lalaurenista[4].

Click here[5] for previous articles by Wiliams.

References

  1. ^ launched (www.army.mil)
  2. ^ trainable and scalable (defensesystems.com)
  3. ^ [email protected] (fcw.com)
  4. ^ @lalaurenista (twitter.com)
  5. ^ Click here (fcw.com)
0

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

Defense

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

  • By Lauren C. Williams
  • Dec 14, 2017
780th Military Intelligence Brigade conduct cyberspace operations during a training rotation for the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., Jan. 24. 2016; (Photo Credit: U.S. Army photo) 

Field cyber training operations at Ft. Irwin in California, from Jan. 2016. (Photo credit: U.S. Army)

What started as an Army Cyber Command-led initiative to train tactical units in offensive cyber operations has blossomed into all-encompassing collaboration focused on operationalizing cyber warfare on the front lines.

But, officially, no such thing exists.

The Cyber Electromagnetic Activities Support to Corps and Below pilot program launched[1] in 2015 and wrapped up its first phase in September. At the Association of the U.S. Army’s “hot topic” event on cyber operations and the future fight Wednesday, Army Cyber leaders reflected on the program and how it can be made even more trainable and scalable[2] across the entire force.

“It was a lot harder to do this in the operational environment than it was to do a PowerPoint slide,” Col. William J. Hartman, U.S. Army Cyber Command’s deputy commander for Joint Force headquarters joked during his AUSA panel on the CEMA program.

“You have to be able to do this in the middle of a monsoon in Polk, La., or any other operational area,” he added. “You have to be able to do this when it’s 118 degrees and the wind is blowing 70 miles an hour.”

Hartman noted that effective communication between cyber and tactical teams is a surmountable challenge. But to be successful at the tactical level, cyber teams must be able to talk about techniques and capabilities in maneuver terms.

“There was a lack of knowledge” from a cyber and operational standpoint on how to integrate with the operational force, which included light infantry airborne, armor and Stryker brigade combat teams.

So far, the CEMA pilot program, which produced expeditionary cyber teams, has participated in eight different rotations where cyber and brigade combat teams train together for six months.

“If the unit is doing a field exercise from Ft. Riley, we go through the field exercise with them,” Hartman said. “We go through any of their battle command training exercises. We participate in their leadership training program that they go through prior to going through prior to going to a combat training center rotation.”

“But right now, expeditionary cyber teams don’t exist in the Army,” Hartman said. He said there were elements of the teams being used worldwide with U.S. allies, but declined to give specifics.

“We formed these teams for specific purposes based on requirements. So whether it’s going to support a lightning force exercise in Korea or Hawaii, or whether it’s going to support a national training exercise or go into [Joint Readiness Training Center] with the S5s. We bring in these soldiers and civilians from across the formation and they stay together for the duration of this thing,” Hartman told reporters following the event.

The ECT teams – typically comprised of fewer than 10 people including defensive and offensive cyber operators, planners, and electronic warfare soldiers — help address specific directives tailored to what skills and capabilities combat commanders need soldiers to have.

“When you look at the Army’s mission of attack and destroy, not everything is ‘destroy,’ [it’s] how can I influence” the adversaries, said Col. Robert Ryan, who commands the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii and has participated in the pilot. “How can I non-kinetically reach up and create confusion and gain control…I don’t have to always render [adversaries] neutral in the sense of death but I can influence them in other ways.”

But all of this is still experimental and there’s no hard timeline on when that will change.

Hartman said CEMA was initially slated for two years but they expect to continue doing three rotations a year, tying them into other initiatives.

Additionally, the Army is still working on how to structure and best integrate the cyber electromagnetic activities at the corps, division, and brigade levels.

“The demand [for information] isn’t going down across society,” said Ryan, who mentioned ECT teams increase his soldiers’ ability to conduct operations. “It’ll be interesting to see how we can leverage that information highway.”

About the Author

Lauren C. Williams is a staff writer at FCW covering defense and cybersecurity.

Prior to joining FCW, Williams was the tech reporter for ThinkProgress, where she covered everything from internet culture to national security issues. In past positions, Williams covered health care, politics and crime for various publications, including The Seattle Times.

Williams graduated with a master’s in journalism from the University of Maryland, College Park and a bachelor’s in dietetics from the University of Delaware. She can be contacted at [email protected][3], or follow her on Twitter @lalaurenista[4].

Click here[5] for previous articles by Wiliams.

References

  1. ^ launched (www.army.mil)
  2. ^ trainable and scalable (defensesystems.com)
  3. ^ [email protected] (fcw.com)
  4. ^ @lalaurenista (twitter.com)
  5. ^ Click here (fcw.com)
0

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

Defense

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

  • By Lauren C. Williams
  • Dec 14, 2017
780th Military Intelligence Brigade conduct cyberspace operations during a training rotation for the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., Jan. 24. 2016; (Photo Credit: U.S. Army photo) 

Field cyber training operations at Ft. Irwin in California, from Jan. 2016. (Photo credit: U.S. Army)

What started as an Army Cyber Command-led initiative to train tactical units in offensive cyber operations has blossomed into all-encompassing collaboration focused on operationalizing cyber warfare on the front lines.

But, officially, no such thing exists.

The Cyber Electromagnetic Activities Support to Corps and Below pilot program launched[1] in 2015 and wrapped up its first phase in September. At the Association of the U.S. Army’s “hot topic” event on cyber operations and the future fight Wednesday, Army Cyber leaders reflected on the program and how it can be made even more trainable and scalable[2] across the entire force.

“It was a lot harder to do this in the operational environment than it was to do a PowerPoint slide,” Col. William J. Hartman, U.S. Army Cyber Command’s deputy commander for Joint Force headquarters joked during his AUSA panel on the CEMA program.

“You have to be able to do this in the middle of a monsoon in Polk, La., or any other operational area,” he added. “You have to be able to do this when it’s 118 degrees and the wind is blowing 70 miles an hour.”

Hartman noted that effective communication between cyber and tactical teams is a surmountable challenge. But to be successful at the tactical level, cyber teams must be able to talk about techniques and capabilities in maneuver terms.

“There was a lack of knowledge” from a cyber and operational standpoint on how to integrate with the operational force, which included light infantry airborne, armor and Stryker brigade combat teams.

So far, the CEMA pilot program, which produced expeditionary cyber teams, has participated in eight different rotations where cyber and brigade combat teams train together for six months.

“If the unit is doing a field exercise from Ft. Riley, we go through the field exercise with them,” Hartman said. “We go through any of their battle command training exercises. We participate in their leadership training program that they go through prior to going through prior to going to a combat training center rotation.”

“But right now, expeditionary cyber teams don’t exist in the Army,” Hartman said. He said there were elements of the teams being used worldwide with U.S. allies, but declined to give specifics.

“We formed these teams for specific purposes based on requirements. So whether it’s going to support a lightning force exercise in Korea or Hawaii, or whether it’s going to support a national training exercise or go into [Joint Readiness Training Center] with the S5s. We bring in these soldiers and civilians from across the formation and they stay together for the duration of this thing,” Hartman told reporters following the event.

The ECT teams – typically comprised of fewer than 10 people including defensive and offensive cyber operators, planners, and electronic warfare soldiers — help address specific directives tailored to what skills and capabilities combat commanders need soldiers to have.

“When you look at the Army’s mission of attack and destroy, not everything is ‘destroy,’ [it’s] how can I influence” the adversaries, said Col. Robert Ryan, who commands the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii and has participated in the pilot. “How can I non-kinetically reach up and create confusion and gain control…I don’t have to always render [adversaries] neutral in the sense of death but I can influence them in other ways.”

But all of this is still experimental and there’s no hard timeline on when that will change.

Hartman said CEMA was initially slated for two years but they expect to continue doing three rotations a year, tying them into other initiatives.

Additionally, the Army is still working on how to structure and best integrate the cyber electromagnetic activities at the corps, division, and brigade levels.

“The demand [for information] isn’t going down across society,” said Ryan, who mentioned ECT teams increase his soldiers’ ability to conduct operations. “It’ll be interesting to see how we can leverage that information highway.”

About the Author

Lauren C. Williams is a staff writer at FCW covering defense and cybersecurity.

Prior to joining FCW, Williams was the tech reporter for ThinkProgress, where she covered everything from internet culture to national security issues. In past positions, Williams covered health care, politics and crime for various publications, including The Seattle Times.

Williams graduated with a master’s in journalism from the University of Maryland, College Park and a bachelor’s in dietetics from the University of Delaware. She can be contacted at [email protected][3], or follow her on Twitter @lalaurenista[4].

Click here[5] for previous articles by Wiliams.

References

  1. ^ launched (www.army.mil)
  2. ^ trainable and scalable (defensesystems.com)
  3. ^ [email protected] (fcw.com)
  4. ^ @lalaurenista (twitter.com)
  5. ^ Click here (fcw.com)
0

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

Defense

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

  • By Lauren C. Williams
  • Dec 14, 2017
780th Military Intelligence Brigade conduct cyberspace operations during a training rotation for the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., Jan. 24. 2016; (Photo Credit: U.S. Army photo) 

Field cyber training operations at Ft. Irwin in California, from Jan. 2016. (Photo credit: U.S. Army)

What started as an Army Cyber Command-led initiative to train tactical units in offensive cyber operations has blossomed into all-encompassing collaboration focused on operationalizing cyber warfare on the front lines.

But, officially, no such thing exists.

The Cyber Electromagnetic Activities Support to Corps and Below pilot program launched[1] in 2015 and wrapped up its first phase in September. At the Association of the U.S. Army’s “hot topic” event on cyber operations and the future fight Wednesday, Army Cyber leaders reflected on the program and how it can be made even more trainable and scalable[2] across the entire force.

“It was a lot harder to do this in the operational environment than it was to do a PowerPoint slide,” Col. William J. Hartman, U.S. Army Cyber Command’s deputy commander for Joint Force headquarters joked during his AUSA panel on the CEMA program.

“You have to be able to do this in the middle of a monsoon in Polk, La., or any other operational area,” he added. “You have to be able to do this when it’s 118 degrees and the wind is blowing 70 miles an hour.”

Hartman noted that effective communication between cyber and tactical teams is a surmountable challenge. But to be successful at the tactical level, cyber teams must be able to talk about techniques and capabilities in maneuver terms.

“There was a lack of knowledge” from a cyber and operational standpoint on how to integrate with the operational force, which included light infantry airborne, armor and Stryker brigade combat teams.

So far, the CEMA pilot program, which produced expeditionary cyber teams, has participated in eight different rotations where cyber and brigade combat teams train together for six months.

“If the unit is doing a field exercise from Ft. Riley, we go through the field exercise with them,” Hartman said. “We go through any of their battle command training exercises. We participate in their leadership training program that they go through prior to going through prior to going to a combat training center rotation.”

“But right now, expeditionary cyber teams don’t exist in the Army,” Hartman said. He said there were elements of the teams being used worldwide with U.S. allies, but declined to give specifics.

“We formed these teams for specific purposes based on requirements. So whether it’s going to support a lightning force exercise in Korea or Hawaii, or whether it’s going to support a national training exercise or go into [Joint Readiness Training Center] with the S5s. We bring in these soldiers and civilians from across the formation and they stay together for the duration of this thing,” Hartman told reporters following the event.

The ECT teams – typically comprised of fewer than 10 people including defensive and offensive cyber operators, planners, and electronic warfare soldiers — help address specific directives tailored to what skills and capabilities combat commanders need soldiers to have.

“When you look at the Army’s mission of attack and destroy, not everything is ‘destroy,’ [it’s] how can I influence” the adversaries, said Col. Robert Ryan, who commands the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii and has participated in the pilot. “How can I non-kinetically reach up and create confusion and gain control…I don’t have to always render [adversaries] neutral in the sense of death but I can influence them in other ways.”

But all of this is still experimental and there’s no hard timeline on when that will change.

Hartman said CEMA was initially slated for two years but they expect to continue doing three rotations a year, tying them into other initiatives.

Additionally, the Army is still working on how to structure and best integrate the cyber electromagnetic activities at the corps, division, and brigade levels.

“The demand [for information] isn’t going down across society,” said Ryan, who mentioned ECT teams increase his soldiers’ ability to conduct operations. “It’ll be interesting to see how we can leverage that information highway.”

About the Author

Lauren C. Williams is a staff writer at FCW covering defense and cybersecurity.

Prior to joining FCW, Williams was the tech reporter for ThinkProgress, where she covered everything from internet culture to national security issues. In past positions, Williams covered health care, politics and crime for various publications, including The Seattle Times.

Williams graduated with a master’s in journalism from the University of Maryland, College Park and a bachelor’s in dietetics from the University of Delaware. She can be contacted at [email protected][3], or follow her on Twitter @lalaurenista[4].

Click here[5] for previous articles by Wiliams.

References

  1. ^ launched (www.army.mil)
  2. ^ trainable and scalable (defensesystems.com)
  3. ^ [email protected] (fcw.com)
  4. ^ @lalaurenista (twitter.com)
  5. ^ Click here (fcw.com)
0

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

Defense

Lessons learned from training Army combat units in cyber ops

  • By Lauren C. Williams
  • Dec 14, 2017
780th Military Intelligence Brigade conduct cyberspace operations during a training rotation for the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., Jan. 24. 2016; (Photo Credit: U.S. Army photo) 

Field cyber training operations at Ft. Irwin in California, from Jan. 2016. (Photo credit: U.S. Army)

What started as an Army Cyber Command-led initiative to train tactical units in offensive cyber operations has blossomed into all-encompassing collaboration focused on operationalizing cyber warfare on the front lines.

But, officially, no such thing exists.

The Cyber Electromagnetic Activities Support to Corps and Below pilot program launched[1] in 2015 and wrapped up its first phase in September. At the Association of the U.S. Army’s “hot topic” event on cyber operations and the future fight Wednesday, Army Cyber leaders reflected on the program and how it can be made even more trainable and scalable[2] across the entire force.

“It was a lot harder to do this in the operational environment than it was to do a PowerPoint slide,” Col. William J. Hartman, U.S. Army Cyber Command’s deputy commander for Joint Force headquarters joked during his AUSA panel on the CEMA program.

“You have to be able to do this in the middle of a monsoon in Polk, La., or any other operational area,” he added. “You have to be able to do this when it’s 118 degrees and the wind is blowing 70 miles an hour.”

Hartman noted that effective communication between cyber and tactical teams is a surmountable challenge. But to be successful at the tactical level, cyber teams must be able to talk about techniques and capabilities in maneuver terms.

“There was a lack of knowledge” from a cyber and operational standpoint on how to integrate with the operational force, which included light infantry airborne, armor and Stryker brigade combat teams.

So far, the CEMA pilot program, which produced expeditionary cyber teams, has participated in eight different rotations where cyber and brigade combat teams train together for six months.

“If the unit is doing a field exercise from Ft. Riley, we go through the field exercise with them,” Hartman said. “We go through any of their battle command training exercises. We participate in their leadership training program that they go through prior to going through prior to going to a combat training center rotation.”

“But right now, expeditionary cyber teams don’t exist in the Army,” Hartman said. He said there were elements of the teams being used worldwide with U.S. allies, but declined to give specifics.

“We formed these teams for specific purposes based on requirements. So whether it’s going to support a lightning force exercise in Korea or Hawaii, or whether it’s going to support a national training exercise or go into [Joint Readiness Training Center] with the S5s. We bring in these soldiers and civilians from across the formation and they stay together for the duration of this thing,” Hartman told reporters following the event.

The ECT teams – typically comprised of fewer than 10 people including defensive and offensive cyber operators, planners, and electronic warfare soldiers — help address specific directives tailored to what skills and capabilities combat commanders need soldiers to have.

“When you look at the Army’s mission of attack and destroy, not everything is ‘destroy,’ [it’s] how can I influence” the adversaries, said Col. Robert Ryan, who commands the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii and has participated in the pilot. “How can I non-kinetically reach up and create confusion and gain control…I don’t have to always render [adversaries] neutral in the sense of death but I can influence them in other ways.”

But all of this is still experimental and there’s no hard timeline on when that will change.

Hartman said CEMA was initially slated for two years but they expect to continue doing three rotations a year, tying them into other initiatives.

Additionally, the Army is still working on how to structure and best integrate the cyber electromagnetic activities at the corps, division, and brigade levels.

“The demand [for information] isn’t going down across society,” said Ryan, who mentioned ECT teams increase his soldiers’ ability to conduct operations. “It’ll be interesting to see how we can leverage that information highway.”

About the Author

Lauren C. Williams is a staff writer at FCW covering defense and cybersecurity.

Prior to joining FCW, Williams was the tech reporter for ThinkProgress, where she covered everything from internet culture to national security issues. In past positions, Williams covered health care, politics and crime for various publications, including The Seattle Times.

Williams graduated with a master’s in journalism from the University of Maryland, College Park and a bachelor’s in dietetics from the University of Delaware. She can be contacted at [email protected][3], or follow her on Twitter @lalaurenista[4].

Click here[5] for previous articles by Wiliams.

References

  1. ^ launched (www.army.mil)
  2. ^ trainable and scalable (defensesystems.com)
  3. ^ [email protected] (fcw.com)
  4. ^ @lalaurenista (twitter.com)
  5. ^ Click here (fcw.com)
0

F-22s Fire Warning Flares at Russian Jets in Coalition Territory

Two U.S. F-22 Raptor[1] stealth fighters intercepted two Russian Su-25 fighter jets Wednesday, conducting multiple maneuvers, firing warning flares and, in one instance, aggressively flying to avoid colliding with one another, U.S. officials tell Military.com.

The Su-25s — single-seat, twin-engine aircraft — “flew into coordinated coalition airspace on the east side of the Euphrates River near Abu Kamal, Syria, and were promptly intercepted,” Air Forces Central Command spokesman Lt. Col. Damien Pickart told Military.com in an email.

The F-22s, the U.S.’ most advanced fighter aside from the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter[2], were in the area providing air cover for partner ground forces conducting operations against the Islamic State, he said.

“The F-22s conducted multiple maneuvers to persuade the Su-25s to depart our deconflicted airspace, including the release of chaff and flares in close proximity to the Russian aircraft and placing multiple calls on the emergency channel to convey to the Russian pilots that they needed to depart the area,” Pickart said.

During one maneuver, an Su-25 flew so close to an F-22 “that it had to aggressively maneuver to avoid a midair collision,” he said.

Related content:

A Russian Su-35 multi-role fighter was also involved.

An F-22 ended up trailing the Su-35 after it flew across the river into territory deemed unsafe to coalition aircraft.

“The incident lasted approximately 40 minutes before the Russian aircraft flew to the west side of the river. During and following the encounter, coalition leaders at the [Combined Air Operations Center in Al Udeid, Qatar] contacted the Russians on the deconfliction line to de-escalate the situation and avert a strategic miscalculation,” Pickart said.

AFCENT officials said the Russians had “verbally agreed” in November through the deconfliction line that they would remain west of the Euphrates River, and the coalition would operate to the East, he said.

“Since agreeing to this deconfliction arrangement, the Russians have flown into our airspace on the east side of the river 6-8 times per day, or approximately 10 percent of the Russian and Syrian flights,” Pickart noted.

“If either of us needs to cross the river for any reason, we’re supposed to first deconflict via the line,” he said. “It’s become increasingly tough for our pilots to discern whether Russian pilots’ actions are deliberate or if these are just honest mistakes.”

Officials have said recently that coalition aircraft — more than a dozen air forces cooperating to defeat ISIS in Iraq and Syria — are concerned about the shrinking airspace.

“The coalition’s greatest concern is that we could shoot down a Russian aircraft because its actions are seen as a threat to our air or ground forces,” Pickart said. “We train our aircrew to take specific actions and to make every attempt possible to de-escalate the situation wherever possible.”

He continued, “We are not here to fight the Russians and Syrians — our focus remains on defeating ISIS. That said, if anyone threatens coalition or friendly partner forces in the air or on the ground, we will defend them.”

— Oriana Pawlyk can be reached at [email protected][3]. Follow her on Twitter at @Oriana0214[4].

© Copyright 2017 Military.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

References

  1. ^ F-22 Raptor (www.military.com)
  2. ^ F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (www.military.com)
  3. ^ [email protected] (www.military.com)
  4. ^ @Oriana0214 (twitter.com)
0

F-22s Fire Warning Flares at Russian Jets in Coalition Territory

Two U.S. F-22 Raptor[1] stealth fighters intercepted two Russian Su-25 fighter jets Wednesday, conducting multiple maneuvers, firing warning flares and, in one instance, aggressively flying to avoid colliding with one another, U.S. officials tell Military.com.

The Su-25s — single-seat, twin-engine aircraft — “flew into coordinated coalition airspace on the east side of the Euphrates River near Abu Kamal, Syria, and were promptly intercepted,” Air Forces Central Command spokesman Lt. Col. Damien Pickart told Military.com in an email.

The F-22s, the U.S.’ most advanced fighter aside from the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter[2], were in the area providing air cover for partner ground forces conducting operations against the Islamic State, he said.

“The F-22s conducted multiple maneuvers to persuade the Su-25s to depart our deconflicted airspace, including the release of chaff and flares in close proximity to the Russian aircraft and placing multiple calls on the emergency channel to convey to the Russian pilots that they needed to depart the area,” Pickart said.

During one maneuver, an Su-25 flew so close to an F-22 “that it had to aggressively maneuver to avoid a midair collision,” he said.

Related content:

The F-22 ended up trailing that Su-35 after it flew across the river into territory deemed unsafe to coalition aircraft.

“The incident lasted approximately 40 minutes before the Russian aircraft flew to the west side of the river. During and following the encounter, coalition leaders at the [Combined Air Operations Center in Al Udeid, Qatar] contacted the Russians on the deconfliction line to de-escalate the situation and avert a strategic miscalculation,” Pickart said.

AFCENT officials said the Russians had “verbally agreed” in November through the deconfliction line that they would remain west of the Euphrates River, and the coalition would operate to the East, he said.

“Since agreeing to this deconfliction arrangement, the Russians have flown into our airspace on the east side of the river 6-8 times per day, or approximately 10 percent of the Russian and Syrian flights,” Pickart noted.

“If either of us needs to cross the river for any reason, we’re supposed to first deconflict via the line,” he said. “It’s become increasingly tough for our pilots to discern whether Russian pilots’ actions are deliberate or if these are just honest mistakes.”

Officials have said recently that coalition aircraft — more than a dozen air forces cooperating to defeat ISIS in Iraq and Syria — are concerned about the shrinking airspace.

“The coalition’s greatest concern is that we could shoot down a Russian aircraft because its actions are seen as a threat to our air or ground forces,” Pickart said. “We train our aircrew to take specific actions and to make every attempt possible to de-escalate the situation wherever possible.”

He continued, “We are not here to fight the Russians and Syrians — our focus remains on defeating ISIS. That said, if anyone threatens coalition or friendly partner forces in the air or on the ground, we will defend them.”

— Oriana Pawlyk can be reached at [email protected][3]. Follow her on Twitter at @Oriana0214[4].

© Copyright 2017 Military.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

References

  1. ^ F-22 Raptor (www.military.com)
  2. ^ F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (www.military.com)
  3. ^ [email protected] (www.military.com)
  4. ^ @Oriana0214 (twitter.com)
0

F-22s Fire Warning Flares at Russian Jets in Coalition Territory

Two U.S. F-22 Raptor[1] stealth fighters intercepted two Russian Su-25 fighter jets Wednesday, conducting multiple maneuvers, firing warning flares and, in one instance, aggressively flying to avoid colliding with one another, U.S. officials tell Military.com.

The Su-25s — single-seat, twin-engine aircraft — “flew into coordinated coalition airspace on the east side of the Euphrates River near Abu Kamal, Syria, and were promptly intercepted,” Air Forces Central Command spokesman Lt. Col. Damien Pickart told Military.com in an email.

The F-22s, the U.S.’ most advanced fighter aside from the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter[2], were in the area providing air cover for partner ground forces conducting operations against the Islamic State, he said.

“The F-22s conducted multiple maneuvers to persuade the Su-25s to depart our deconflicted airspace, including the release of chaff and flares in close proximity to the Russian aircraft and placing multiple calls on the emergency channel to convey to the Russian pilots that they needed to depart the area,” Pickart said.

During one maneuver, an Su-25 flew so close to an F-22 “that it had to aggressively maneuver to avoid a midair collision,” he said.

Related content:

A Russian Su-35 was also involved.

An F-22 ended up trailing the Su-35 after it flew across the river into territory deemed unsafe to coalition aircraft.

“The incident lasted approximately 40 minutes before the Russian aircraft flew to the west side of the river. During and following the encounter, coalition leaders at the [Combined Air Operations Center in Al Udeid, Qatar] contacted the Russians on the deconfliction line to de-escalate the situation and avert a strategic miscalculation,” Pickart said.

AFCENT officials said the Russians had “verbally agreed” in November through the deconfliction line that they would remain west of the Euphrates River, and the coalition would operate to the East, he said.

“Since agreeing to this deconfliction arrangement, the Russians have flown into our airspace on the east side of the river 6-8 times per day, or approximately 10 percent of the Russian and Syrian flights,” Pickart noted.

“If either of us needs to cross the river for any reason, we’re supposed to first deconflict via the line,” he said. “It’s become increasingly tough for our pilots to discern whether Russian pilots’ actions are deliberate or if these are just honest mistakes.”

Officials have said recently that coalition aircraft — more than a dozen air forces cooperating to defeat ISIS in Iraq and Syria — are concerned about the shrinking airspace.

“The coalition’s greatest concern is that we could shoot down a Russian aircraft because its actions are seen as a threat to our air or ground forces,” Pickart said. “We train our aircrew to take specific actions and to make every attempt possible to de-escalate the situation wherever possible.”

He continued, “We are not here to fight the Russians and Syrians — our focus remains on defeating ISIS. That said, if anyone threatens coalition or friendly partner forces in the air or on the ground, we will defend them.”

— Oriana Pawlyk can be reached at [email protected][3]. Follow her on Twitter at @Oriana0214[4].

© Copyright 2017 Military.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

References

  1. ^ F-22 Raptor (www.military.com)
  2. ^ F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (www.military.com)
  3. ^ [email protected] (www.military.com)
  4. ^ @Oriana0214 (twitter.com)